VIDEO: No Transparency on Obama’s Political Donations Executive Order

Last week, the House joint Oversight and Small Business Committee held a hearing on a proposed Obama Executive Order mandating the disclosure of political donations by government contractors. The Committee questioned White House aide Daniel Gordon on the Order. His response? He danced, dodged, bobbed and weaved around the Committee’s questions, as captured in this video, above:

Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC): Does it strike you at all as being ironic to invoke confidentiality and not answering questions when we’re having a hearing about transparency?”

Gordon: “It does not, sir. I think there are discussions, even about transparency and developing rules about transparency that we need to be able to have quietly and behind closed doors.”

This wasn’t the first time the White House has faced questions on the Order, which amounts to an attempt to make an end-run around Congress in order to implement restrictions on political speech. Twenty-seven senators sent a letter to the president questioning the Order in late April.

It would require any company bidding on a government contract to disclose all political contributions made in the two years before the bid by the company, its affiliates and subsidiaries, and any of its directors or officers …

It would require government contractors to disclose any contributions they make to third-party organizations “with the intention or reasonable expectation” that the funds will be used to make “independent expenditures or electioneering communications.”

The order wouldn’t apply to federal employee unions or many nonprofits that receive federal grants and, as von Spakovsky writes:

What is really going on here is a transparent attempt to introduce political gamesmanship into the government contracting business by the Obama administration. It is a cynical attempt to use the guise of reform to achieve political goals at the cost of the liberty that all Americans have to participate in the political process, and to voice their political opinions, without fear of retribution to themselves and their businesses.

So while the White House’s intentions are transparent, the decisions surrounding the Order are not. But don’t be surprised. On everything ranging from health care, net neutrality, the New START treaty and closed-door meetings with liberal organizations, the Obama Administration has thumbed its nose at transparency, despite the president’s commitment to make his administration the most open and transparent in history.

Join The Discussion

This is the most secretive president, bar none. He is attempting to destroy the republican party. If obama gets his way we will be a two party country only in theory. This man in bent on taking over this country and if he win re election we are doomed.

Our interests are not being well served, Mr. President. The rule of law is not being conducted by you, Mr. President. You won't live up to the rule of law, so you "change" (convolute/circumvent) it.

To disclose the fact you stand on transparency yet the actions of you and your administration clearly oppose your words regarding your claimed transparency. You set rules on everyone while you have no intent on following yourself. You're not honest and I will not vote for you.

This is chicago-style politics and the total hypocrisy of obama and his cronies is

always overlooked by their mainstream media minions!

If they truly wanted transparency, they would include EVERYONE-unions and non-profits that almost exclusively support democrats. If they do get this thru, watch them scream when unions and tradional democratic supporters are added to the list!

[…] and Small Business Committee held a hearing on a proposed Presidential Executive Order which would mandate the disclosure of their political donations by contractors who wanted to do business with the government. If a […]

If these disclosures are already required, what Obama is doing is suspicious. Why the extra attension? If he is asking for further disclosure I do support that. We need transparancy especially since we have annual deficits of over a trillion dollars.

I do feel that every federal contractor should disclose whom they donated money to so that we the people can know what our politicians are up to. $400 billion alone is going to defense contractors, which is a huge sum! Many in the military complain that much of what congress pushes on them is useless and unnecessary. If a campaign donation precipitated this wasteful expenditure, we need to know the politicians responsible and prosecute.

However, in the same light that contractors should be disclosing their donations, so should unions and community organizations. The same corruption that is born out of corporate greed exists in the non-profits greed as well. They are BOTH after the same thing, the taxpayer's money.

I do not care if it is the White House or some private sector website. We the people should be privy to the information regarding who donates what to whom.

We conservatives should not be fearful of this disclosure either – nor should we be fighting it.

Whatever the statists tell us they will do better than anyone else, be it transparency, job-creation, education, healthcare, war, border security, domestic oil production, etc., they will do worse than anyone else.

This is just another example of this administration saying do as I say not as I do. Apparently the rules do not apply tho Obama and friends. If I were trying to get a government contract, I would surely donate to the democrats or the chances of my bid being chosen would be nil. Such openess and transparency in this administration! I can't wait to hear what Obama espouses in his campaign speeches this year.

Barack Obama is the ultimate antithesis of transparency in office. He is not in any way shape or form restricted by the rule of law, human ethics, or honesty.In my opinion he is constantly in a mode of deception, always saying whatever things he feels will serve him well politically, but actually doing whatever things he can to advance his ultra left wing political agenda. In short, he can seldom if ever be taken at his word. This is not only a very dangerous character flaw for the most powerful person in the free world, but a sad commentary on our electorate who put him in office, and worse still for the future of our great nation. Let us hope and pray we can summon the collective will to rid ourselves of this millstone taking us down.

Obama says one thing that sounds great but then he does another. The Bible says you will know them by their Fruits! Obama's fruits are deception and higher debt and granting special favors for his allies.

Therefore I propose that Obama has gone from the Whitehouse to the Outhouse!

Wow! Me thinks the corporates protesteth too much. Funny how the corporates expect sunshine from all but themselves….turns the transparency issue on its head.

First off, Mike, don't tarnish your credibility…don't cut and paste the video…readers should go back to the original CSPAN video and listen to Gordon in context and completely…Gordon clearly is reluctant to answer because he simply doesn't know the answer. More to the point, Daniel Gordon isn't the problem…the problem is quid-pro-quo and influence peddling. Gordon should have said as much and not accepted a false premise.

If a vendor, whether a local construction company or a large international company enjoying the backing of a foreign sovereign, is paying to play, the answer is yes, the American people are entitled to know that. And, if our representatives are taking funds from foreign governments through corporates…..and they are….the American people are entitled to know that.

Not really an earth-shattering notion….indeed, seems fundamentally anti-American to me to permit any entity (including the principals thereof) that lacks suffrage to influence our representatives without disclosure. Not saying they can't influence….just asking them to tell us who they are "bribing," or rather, "influencing." Since when is secrecy a good thing in government? Are we afraid that too much knowledge in the hands of the American people may lead to failed re-elections? Yeah….thought so…and all reasonable Americans applaud it.

Since 1989, Joe Lieberman has received more than $31,400,000.00, yup that's over 31 million dollars, in campaign donations from corporates, directly and/or indirectly….it's mindnumingly naive (to be charitable) to imagine that he wasn't influenced by that.

If Mr. Gordon doesn't "feel comfortable addressing the issue of transparency", the announced reason for his appearance, then why is he there? And, if he won't answer, then why isn't he being cited for contempt of Congress? Given BO's campaign rhetoric, why doesn't he answer as his boss presumably would have wanted him to answer, namely candidly? And, if he doesn't (want to), why doesn't BO fire him? Obvious answer: BO wants him to keep mum about a whole bunch of things. Obvious response to that: Start IMPEACHING BHO! For lying to the public!

We, the public, are becoming tired of this never ending game of charades! You, members of Congress, are not?! How come? Your "pay grade" too high? Well, we CAN fix that!

The Conservative Media is MISLEADING the American Public. Do you research and find out the truth for yourself. The misleading physiological effect of Sound Bites with Power Words are being wrote for Big Business and Political Pac's to saturate the Media that is mislead the American People.

Don’t have time to read the Washington Post or New York Times? Then get The Morning Bell, an early morning edition of the day’s most important political news, conservative commentary and original reporting from a team committed to following the truth no matter where it leads.

Email address

Ever feel like the only difference between the New York Times and Washington Post is the name? We do. Try the Morning Bell and get the day’s most important news and commentary from a team committed to the truth in formats that respect your time…and your intelligence.